ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2021
A New Anthropomorphic Mannequin for Efficacy Evaluation of Thoracic Protective Equipment Against Blast Threats.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure to blast is one of the major causes of death and disability in recent military conflicts. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the protective capability of the ballistic-proof equipment worn by soldiers against the effects of blast overpressure (i.e., primary blast injuries). A focus will be made on thoracic protective equipment (TPE). An anthropomorphic mannequin, called BOPMAN, and anesthetized swine both wearing soft, hard or no ballistic protection, were subjected to an open-field high-intensity blast. For swine, thoracic wall motion (acceleration and velocity) was recorded during blast exposure and severity of lung injury was evaluated postmortem. Different data were collected from BOPMAN thoracic responses, including reflected and internal pressure, as well as the force at the rear face of the instrumented part. The severity of blast-induced lung injuries (contusion extent, Axelsson Severity Scale) and the thoracic wall motion were decreased in animals protected with thoracic ceramic hard plates as compared to those wearing soft or no protection. There was a clear trend towards greater lung injury in animals protected with the soft body armor used, even when compared to unprotected animals. In line with these experimental data, the measured force as well as the force impulse measured using BOPMAN were also decreased with a ceramic hard plate protection and increased when a soft ballistic pack was used compared to no protection. Comparison of data collected on BOPMAN and swine equipped with the same protection level revealed that those two force parameters were well correlated with the level of blast-induced lung injury (force, R
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.